Cleveland Browns vs Philadelphia Eagles Match Player Stats
The Cleveland Browns vs Philadelphia Eagles match player stats from August 16, 2025, reveal how Cleveland secured a 22-13 preseason victory through a productive rushing attack, timely defensive plays, and reliable field-goal kicking. The Eagles showed flashes of offensive potential, but their limited rushing production and difficulty sustaining drives made it harder to keep pace. Both teams also recorded an interception returned for a touchdown, making defensive scoring one of the defining features of the contest.
Played during the 2025 NFL preseason, this matchup offered a useful look at developing quarterbacks, running backs competing for opportunities, receivers trying to establish consistency, and defensive players looking to make an impression. The final score tells only part of the story. A closer examination of the passing numbers, rushing efficiency, receiving production, turnovers, special teams, and defensive contributions provides a clearer picture of how Cleveland won and where Philadelphia struggled.
Game Overview: Cleveland Browns vs Philadelphia Eagles Match Player Stats
The Cleveland Browns defeated the Philadelphia Eagles 22-13 on August 16, 2025. According to the supplied ESPN box-score data, Cleveland improved to 2-0 in the preseason, while Philadelphia moved to 1-1.
| Game Information | Details |
| Matchup | Cleveland Browns vs Philadelphia Eagles |
| Date | August 16, 2025 |
| Competition | NFL preseason |
| Final score | Browns 22, Eagles 13 |
| Winning team | Cleveland Browns |
| Losing team | Philadelphia Eagles |
| Cleveland preseason record | 2-0 |
| Philadelphia preseason record | 1-1 |
| Cleveland passing yards | 199 |
| Philadelphia passing yards | 55 |
| Cleveland rushing yards | 132 |
| Philadelphia rushing yards | 33 |
| Cleveland field goals | 3 of 3 |
| Philadelphia field goals | 0 attempts |
| Defensive touchdowns | One for each team |
Cleveland produced 331 combined passing and rushing yards, compared with Philadelphia’s 88. That difference of 243 yards highlights the contrast between the offenses in this particular game.
The Browns gained 99 more rushing yards and 144 more passing yards than the Eagles. Cleveland also converted all three of its field-goal attempts, giving its offense another way to add points when drives did not finish with a touchdown.
However, the score should be interpreted in the context of preseason football. Teams frequently rotate players, evaluate backups, and test different combinations. These numbers describe this game rather than establishing how either team would perform over a full regular season.
Quarter-by-Quarter Score Breakdown
The scoring pattern shows that Cleveland established an early advantage and maintained it, while Philadelphia’s only scoring quarter was the second.
| Quarter | Cleveland Browns | Philadelphia Eagles |
| First quarter | 6 | 0 |
| Second quarter | 6 | 13 |
| Third quarter | 7 | 0 |
| Fourth quarter | 3 | 0 |
| Final score | 22 | 13 |
First quarter: Cleveland takes the lead
Cleveland scored six points in the opening quarter, while Philadelphia failed to score. The Browns’ early advantage gave them room to evaluate their offensive personnel without immediately needing to chase the game.
Philadelphia’s scoreless opening period also meant that the Eagles had to respond rather than dictate the early pace.
Second quarter: Philadelphia answers
The Eagles scored all 13 of their points in the second quarter, briefly turning the game into a closer contest. Their scoring included a passing touchdown, while their defense also contributed to the game’s unusual pattern of defensive touchdowns.
Cleveland added another six points during the period. Although Philadelphia won the quarter on the scoreboard, it did not carry that scoring momentum into the second half.
Third quarter: Cleveland regains control
Cleveland scored seven unanswered points in the third quarter. That response proved important because it restored the Browns’ lead and left Philadelphia without a scoring answer during the period.
The Browns’ ability to combine offensive production with defensive disruption helped them maintain control of the game.
Fourth quarter: The Browns finish the job
Cleveland added a field goal in the final quarter, extending its lead to nine points. Philadelphia remained scoreless after halftime.
The final period reinforced the importance of Cleveland’s earlier scoring and its ability to add points without relying exclusively on touchdowns.
Cleveland Browns Player Stats: Passing Performance
Cleveland’s passing game was productive enough to support its running attack, although the quarterbacks did not record a passing touchdown. The team completed 23 of 31 attempts for 199 yards, averaging 6.9 yards per attempt.
The most notable individual performances came from Dillon Gabriel and Tyler Huntley. Both completed more than 70% of their passes, but their results differed in yardage, turnover avoidance, and quarterback rating.
Browns quarterback statistics
| Quarterback | Completions/Attempts | Passing Yards | Average | TDs | INTs | Sacks | Passer Rating |
| Dillon Gabriel | 13/18 | 143 | 7.9 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 72.2 |
| Tyler Huntley | 10/13 | 71 | 5.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 88.9 |
| Team total | 23/31 | 199 | 6.9 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 79.2 |
Dillon Gabriel: 143 passing yards
Dillon Gabriel led Cleveland in passing yards with 143 on 13 completions from 18 attempts. His completion rate was approximately 72.2%, and his average gain was 7.9 yards per attempt.
Those figures indicate that Gabriel connected on most of his attempts while producing more passing yardage than any other quarterback in the game.
His performance also included two sacks for a combined loss of 11 yards and one interception. The interception was a significant negative because it interrupted an offensive possession and contributed to the game’s turnover story.
Gabriel’s numbers offer several useful observations:
- Completion efficiency: Completing 13 of 18 passes gave Cleveland a reliable foundation in the passing game.
- Yardage production: His 143 yards accounted for the majority of the Browns’ 199 passing yards.
- Downside: The interception and two sacks show that efficient completion percentages do not automatically mean every possession is productive.
- Scoring: He did not throw a touchdown, so Cleveland depended on its rushing attack, kicking game, and defense for its points.
Gabriel’s performance was therefore a mixture of positive passing production and costly mistakes. The available statistics do not establish whether the interception resulted from a poor decision, a defensive misread, or another factor, so that judgment would require reviewing the play itself.
Tyler Huntley: Efficient relief quarterback play
Tyler Huntley completed 10 of 13 passes for 71 yards without an interception or passing touchdown. He averaged 5.5 yards per attempt and recorded an 88.9 passer rating.
Huntley’s completion rate was approximately 76.9%, higher than Gabriel’s. He also avoided an interception, although he took one sack for a loss of four yards.
His contribution was different from Gabriel’s. Gabriel supplied the larger share of Cleveland’s passing yardage, while Huntley completed a higher percentage of his attempts and protected the ball from interceptions.
Huntley also ran three times for five yards. That modest rushing contribution gave Cleveland another option for moving the ball, although it was not a major source of offensive production.
It is important not to treat Huntley’s higher passer rating as definitive proof that he played better overall. Quarterback ratings summarize selected passing statistics, while a full evaluation also considers play difficulty, pressure, decision-making, down-and-distance situations, and the quality of the opposition.
What Cleveland’s passing numbers reveal
The Browns did not need a passing touchdown to win. Their quarterbacks combined for 199 passing yards, while the running backs supplied 132 rushing yards.
That balance reduced the pressure on the passing game to produce every scoring opportunity. Cleveland could gain yards through the air, use its running backs to advance the ball, and rely on its kickers when touchdowns were unavailable.
The main concern was ball security. Gabriel’s interception was Cleveland’s one recorded offensive interception, and the team also lost a fumble. Those mistakes could become more costly in a game with fewer successful rushing plays or less dependable kicking.
For a preseason evaluation, the most useful conclusion is that Cleveland demonstrated passing efficiency and depth at quarterback, but there remained room to improve possession security and finish drives with offensive touchdowns.
Philadelphia Eagles Player Stats: Passing Performance
Philadelphia’s quarterbacks combined for 55 passing yards, one touchdown, and one interception. They completed 13 of 24 attempts, producing a completion rate of approximately 54.2%.
The Eagles’ average of 2.7 yards per pass attempt shows how difficult it was for the passing offense to generate substantial yardage. Although the team produced a passing touchdown, the overall passing output was far below Cleveland’s.
Eagles quarterback statistics
| Quarterback | Completions/Attempts | Passing Yards | Average | TDs | INTs | Sacks | Passer Rating |
| Kyle McCord | 8/16 | 47 | 2.9 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 77.1 |
| Dorian Thompson-Robinson | 5/8 | 17 | 2.1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 27.1 |
| Team total | 13/24 | 55 | 2.7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 52.1 |
Kyle McCord: A touchdown in a low-yardage performance
Kyle McCord completed eight of 16 passes for 47 yards, throwing one touchdown without an interception. He averaged 2.9 yards per attempt and finished with a 77.1 passer rating.
His passing touchdown was an important positive for Philadelphia because it provided a direct scoring contribution from the offense. Avoiding an interception also helped him preserve possession during his time on the field.
However, the low yardage total limits how much can be inferred from the touchdown alone. McCord’s 47 yards represented most of Philadelphia’s passing production, but his average gain remained below three yards per attempt.
A touchdown can be valuable even when the overall passing output is modest. At the same time, a single scoring play does not necessarily indicate that an offense consistently moved the ball well.
The available statistics support a balanced assessment: McCord produced a touchdown and avoided an interception, but Philadelphia still struggled to gain passing yards.
Dorian Thompson-Robinson: Limited production and a costly interception
Dorian Thompson-Robinson completed five of eight passes for 17 yards. He did not throw a touchdown and recorded one interception, one sack for a nine-yard loss, and a 27.1 passer rating.
His completion percentage was 62.5%, but the average gain of 2.1 yards per attempt reflects limited advancement through the air.
Thompson-Robinson also contributed one interception to the Eagles’ turnover total. In a game where Philadelphia’s rushing attack produced just 33 yards, losing a passing possession placed additional pressure on an offense already struggling to sustain drives.
These numbers describe the outcome of his recorded opportunities, not necessarily the quality of every decision or throw. Film review would be needed to identify whether the main problems involved pressure, receiver separation, route execution, or quarterback decisions.
Why Philadelphia’s passing production mattered
The difference between the teams’ passing totals was substantial:
- Cleveland recorded 199 passing yards.
- Philadelphia recorded 55 passing yards.
- The Browns gained 144 more passing yards.
- Cleveland completed 74.2% of its team attempts, compared with 54.2% for Philadelphia.
That gap made it more difficult for the Eagles to complement their running game with consistent passing gains.
Philadelphia’s lone offensive passing touchdown was useful, but the team needed more sustained production to match Cleveland’s overall yardage. The passing statistics also suggest that evaluating the Eagles’ reserve quarterbacks should involve more than counting touchdowns or interceptions. Completion efficiency, yards per attempt, sacks, and the ability to maintain drives all help explain the bigger picture.
Rushing Statistics: Cleveland’s Biggest Offensive Advantage
The running game was one of the clearest differences in the matchup. Cleveland rushed for 132 yards on 29 attempts, while Philadelphia managed 33 yards on 19 attempts.
The Browns averaged 4.6 yards per carry. The Eagles averaged 1.7.
That 2.9-yard difference per attempt is important because rushing efficiency affects how quickly an offense reaches manageable passing situations, how long it can sustain possessions, and how much pressure it places on its quarterback.
Team rushing comparison
| Statistic | Cleveland Browns | Philadelphia Eagles |
| Rushing attempts | 29 | 19 |
| Rushing yards | 132 | 33 |
| Average yards per carry | 4.6 | 1.7 |
| Rushing touchdowns | 1 | 0 |
| Longest run | 54 yards | 8 yards |
Cleveland gained 99 more rushing yards on 10 additional attempts. Its longest run was 54 yards, compared with Philadelphia’s longest gain of eight yards.
The difference was not simply a matter of carrying the ball more often. Cleveland also generated more yards on each attempt and scored a rushing touchdown.
Pierre Strong Jr.: Cleveland’s leading rusher
Pierre Strong Jr. delivered Cleveland’s largest rushing contribution, recording 13 carries for 89 yards. He averaged 6.8 yards per carry, and his longest run went for 54 yards.
Strong’s 89 yards represented approximately 67.4% of Cleveland’s 132 team rushing yards. His production helped establish the running game as the Browns’ most effective source of consistent offensive advancement.
Three details stand out in his performance.
First, he handled 13 carries, giving him the largest recorded rushing workload among Cleveland’s players. Second, his 54-yard run supplied a substantial portion of his total yardage. Third, his average of 6.8 yards per attempt indicates that he produced more than the team average even when the full rushing total is considered.
His 54-yard run also illustrates why average yards per carry must be interpreted carefully. One long gain can raise a player’s average considerably. To understand his consistency, an analyst would need to examine the yardage of each carry, including unsuccessful runs and gains of shorter distances.
Strong also caught four passes for 10 yards. His receiving production was modest, but it showed that he contributed in both phases of the offense.
Ahmani Marshall: A rushing touchdown
Ahmani Marshall finished with six carries for 25 yards, averaging 4.2 yards per carry. He recorded one rushing touchdown and a longest run of 14 yards.
Marshall’s contribution was valuable because he converted a rushing opportunity into a score. Unlike Strong, whose production was driven by total yardage and a long run, Marshall’s most direct impact came from finding the end zone.
He also recorded one reception for five yards. His combined rushing and receiving output gave Cleveland another option for distributing touches across its offensive personnel.
Marshall’s touchdown demonstrates why running-back evaluations should consider more than total rushing yards. Yardage, scoring opportunities, efficiency, workload, and receiving involvement each tell a different part of the story.
Other Browns rushing contributions
Several additional Cleveland players contributed smaller amounts of rushing production.
| Player | Carries | Rushing Yards | Average | Longest Run |
| Gage Larvadain | 1 | 16 | 16.0 | 16 |
| Toa Taua | 2 | 7 | 3.5 | Not specified |
| Tyler Huntley | 3 | 5 | 1.7 | Not specified |
| Dillon Gabriel | 2 | 1 | 0.5 | Not specified |
| Trayveon Williams | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | Not specified |
| Kaden Davis | 1 | -11 | -11.0 | Not specified |
Gage Larvadain’s single carry gained 16 yards, making it an efficient contribution on limited volume. However, one attempt is too small a sample to establish a repeatable rushing trend.
Kaden Davis recorded a loss of 11 yards on his only carry. That negative play reduced the team’s net rushing production, illustrating how a single unsuccessful attempt can affect the overall numbers.
These additional statistics also show that Cleveland spread rushing opportunities across several players. That distribution is typical of preseason evaluation, when coaches may be interested in testing different personnel combinations rather than relying on a single established back.
Philadelphia’s rushing struggles
Philadelphia’s leading rusher was Montrell Johnson Jr., who recorded six carries for 20 yards. He averaged 3.3 yards per attempt and did not score a rushing touchdown.
Keilan Robinson also had six carries, finishing with nine yards at an average of 1.5 yards per carry. AJ Dillon added seven yards on three attempts, averaging 2.3 yards.
The Eagles’ other listed rushing contributions included two yards on one carry from McCord and minus five yards on three carries from ShunDerrick Powell.
| Player | Carries | Rushing Yards | Average |
| Montrell Johnson Jr. | 6 | 20 | 3.3 |
| Keilan Robinson | 6 | 9 | 1.5 |
| AJ Dillon | 3 | 7 | 2.3 |
| Kyle McCord | 1 | 2 | 2.0 |
| ShunDerrick Powell | 3 | -5 | -1.7 |
Philadelphia did not record a rushing touchdown, and its longest run was only eight yards. The lack of explosive gains meant that the Eagles had fewer opportunities to make rapid progress through the ground game.
A rushing average of 1.7 yards per carry can create difficult passing situations. When early-down runs gain little ground, offenses may face longer third downs and become more dependent on their quarterbacks to produce successful throws.
The numbers do not reveal every factor behind Philadelphia’s struggles. Blocking assignments, defensive penetration, missed tackles, and personnel combinations would require film or additional play-by-play information to evaluate. Nevertheless, the statistical difference is clear: Cleveland’s running game consistently generated more yardage and supplied a rushing score, while Philadelphia’s ground attack did neither at a comparable level.
Receiving Statistics: Which Players Made the Biggest Impact?
Receiving production provides another way to understand the difference between the offenses. Cleveland recorded 214 receiving yards on 23 receptions, while Philadelphia managed 64 yards on 13 receptions.
The Browns averaged 9.3 yards per reception. The Eagles averaged 4.9.
Although Cleveland’s quarterbacks recorded 199 passing yards, the team accumulated 214 receiving yards in its receiving statistics. This difference can occur because passing-yard totals exclude yardage lost to sacks, while receiving yards count the gains recorded on completed passes. The two categories therefore should not be expected to match exactly.
Team receiving comparison
| Statistic | Cleveland Browns | Philadelphia Eagles |
| Receptions | 23 | 13 |
| Targets | 31 | 24 |
| Receiving yards | 214 | 64 |
| Yards per reception | 9.3 | 4.9 |
| Receiving touchdowns | 0 | 1 |
| Longest reception | 29 yards | 12 yards |
Cleveland produced 150 more receiving yards and averaged 4.4 more yards per catch. Philadelphia scored the only listed receiving touchdown, but its receivers generated substantially less total yardage.
This is an important distinction when analyzing football statistics. Touchdowns measure scoring results, while receptions and receiving yards help describe how consistently an offense advances the ball.
Kaden Davis: Cleveland’s leading receiver by yardage
Kaden Davis finished with three receptions for 44 yards on three targets. His average was 14.7 yards per catch, and his longest reception went for 29 yards.
Davis converted every recorded target into a reception, according to the supplied statistics. His 44 receiving yards led all Cleveland receivers in total yardage.
His average of 14.7 yards per catch also suggests that his contributions were more than short, low-gain completions. The 29-yard reception provided Cleveland with an important chunk gain.
However, three targets are a limited sample. His performance was productive in this game, but a single preseason appearance cannot establish how consistently he would perform over a larger workload.
Davis also returned two kickoffs for 60 yards, averaging 30 yards per return. His longest kickoff return was 34 yards. That additional special-teams involvement made him one of Cleveland’s more versatile contributors in the box score.
Gage Larvadain: Contributions on offense and special teams
Gage Larvadain recorded three catches for 43 yards on seven targets. He averaged 14.3 yards per reception, with a longest catch of 26 yards.
His receiving production was close to Davis’s in total yardage, although Larvadain needed more targets to record his three receptions. That difference is relevant when considering target conversion, but it does not explain the circumstances of every incomplete pass.
Larvadain also had one rushing attempt for 16 yards and returned five punts for 36 yards. His longest punt return was 16 yards.
These combined contributions make his statistical line particularly interesting. He contributed as a receiver, added a rushing gain, and handled punt-return duties.
Special-teams involvement can matter in preseason evaluations because players may be considered for multiple responsibilities. Still, the available numbers do not establish his eventual roster status or role.
Jamari Thrash: Consistent receiving volume
Jamari Thrash caught four passes for 43 yards on four targets. He averaged 10.8 yards per reception, and his longest catch covered 19 yards.
Thrash’s four receptions tied him with Pierre Strong Jr. for Cleveland’s highest reception total among the listed players. Unlike Davis and Larvadain, Thrash’s production came through a larger number of completed passes relative to his target count.
His performance offered Cleveland a useful source of intermediate yardage. He did not record a receiving touchdown, but his receptions helped the team move the ball through the air.
Other Cleveland receivers
Cleveland distributed its remaining receiving opportunities among several players.
| Player | Receptions | Receiving Yards |
| Pierre Strong Jr. | 4 | 10 |
| Sal Cannella | 3 | 15 |
| Cedric Tillman | 1 | 18 |
| Brenden Bates | 1 | 13 |
| Blake Whiteheart | 1 | 10 |
| Diontae Johnson | 1 | 7 |
| Trayveon Williams | 1 | 6 |
| Ahmani Marshall | 1 | 5 |
Cedric Tillman gained 18 yards on one reception, while Brenden Bates gained 13 on his single catch. These modest reception totals still added to Cleveland’s overall passing production.
Sal Cannella caught three passes for 15 yards, showing a different type of contribution from the receivers who averaged more yards per catch. Strong’s four catches for 10 yards also demonstrate that running backs can provide receiving outlets even when their primary role involves carrying the ball.
The important point is that Cleveland did not depend on one receiver alone. Davis, Larvadain, and Thrash led the listed receiving production, while other players added smaller gains.
Ainias Smith: Philadelphia’s touchdown scorer
Ainias Smith recorded two receptions for 19 yards on two targets. He averaged 9.5 yards per catch and scored Philadelphia’s listed receiving touchdown.
His touchdown was an important moment for the Eagles, particularly because the team’s overall receiving yardage was limited. Smith’s scoring contribution gave the passing game a tangible result even though the offense did not consistently produce long gains.
Smith also returned one punt for 10 yards. His combination of receiving and return duties added another element to his game-day contribution.
Other Philadelphia receiving leaders
| Player | Receptions | Receiving Yards | Touchdowns |
| Ainias Smith | 2 | 19 | 1 |
| Taylor Morin | 3 | 16 | 0 |
| Terrace Marshall Jr. | 2 | 15 | 0 |
| E.J. Jenkins | 1 | 12 | 0 |
| Nick Muse | 1 | 7 | 0 |
| Keilan Robinson | 1 | 6 | 0 |
| ShunDerrick Powell | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| Giles Jackson | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| AJ Dillon | 1 | -14 | 0 |
Taylor Morin led Philadelphia’s listed receivers in receptions with three, recording 16 yards. Terrace Marshall Jr. added 15 yards on two catches, while E.J. Jenkins gained 12 yards on one reception.
AJ Dillon’s negative 14 receiving yards reduced Philadelphia’s net receiving production. Negative receiving yardage can result from a completed pass followed by a loss, so it should not be confused with an incomplete attempt.
Philadelphia’s receiving statistics reveal a central challenge: the Eagles did find the end zone through Smith, but most of their receiving contributions were relatively short. Their longest reception was 12 yards, compared with Cleveland’s 29-yard maximum.
That gap in explosive passing gains helps explain why the Eagles accumulated only 55 passing yards despite completing 13 passes.
Defensive Player Stats: Interceptions and Defensive Touchdowns
Defense played a major role in the outcome. Both teams recorded an interception returned for a touchdown, producing a rare-looking statistical symmetry in a game otherwise dominated by Cleveland’s offensive yardage advantage.
The Browns recorded one interception returned for 45 yards and a touchdown by KJ Henry. Philadelphia’s Andrew Mukuba recorded an interception returned for 75 yards and a touchdown.
The two plays had direct scoring value, but their return lengths also demonstrate how turnovers can produce significant field-position changes.
Team defensive comparison
| Defensive Statistic | Cleveland Browns | Philadelphia Eagles |
| Total tackles | 50 | 72 |
| Solo tackles | 31 | 49 |
| Sacks | 1 | 3 |
| Tackles for loss | 6 | 6 |
| Passes defended | 5 | 4 |
| Quarterback hits | 6 | 4 |
| Interceptions returned for touchdowns | 1 | 1 |
Philadelphia recorded more total tackles and sacks, while Cleveland had more passes defended and quarterback hits. Both teams recorded six tackles for loss.
These figures require context. A team can record more tackles because it spends more time defending, and more sacks do not automatically mean it wins the game. Cleveland’s 132 rushing yards and 199 passing yards meant that Philadelphia’s defense had to handle a substantial amount of offensive activity.
The Browns, meanwhile, benefited from defensive scoring that helped offset the absence of a passing touchdown.
KJ Henry: Cleveland’s interception return touchdown
KJ Henry recorded an interception, returned it for 45 yards, and scored a defensive touchdown. That play gave Cleveland a major scoring contribution from its defense.
Defensive touchdowns are particularly valuable because they allow a team to score without needing its offense to complete a drive. They can also change the opponent’s approach by forcing it to recover from a sudden increase in the score.
Henry’s interception was therefore one of the defining plays in the game. It also illustrates why turnovers should be considered alongside ordinary defensive statistics such as tackles, sacks, and passes defended.
Andrew Mukuba: Philadelphia’s 75-yard return
Andrew Mukuba recorded an interception and returned it 75 yards for a touchdown. His return was 30 yards longer than Henry’s, giving Philadelphia a substantial defensive scoring play of its own.
Mukuba’s contribution was especially notable because Philadelphia’s offense struggled to generate yardage. A defensive touchdown provided points without requiring the Eagles’ passing or rushing attack to sustain a possession.
Mukuba also recovered a fumble, according to the supplied defensive and fumble statistics. The available data does not establish that the recovered fumble and interception occurred on the same possession, so they should be treated as separate recorded contributions.
Philadelphia’s defense created opportunities to score, but its offensive limitations ultimately remained a major factor in the final result.
Cleveland’s leading tacklers
| Player | Total Tackles | Solo Tackles | Additional Contribution |
| Easton Mascarenas-Arnold | 7 | 4 | Led Cleveland in total tackles |
| Donovan McMillon | 5 | 4 | 1 pass defended |
| Nathaniel Watson | 4 | 3 | 3 tackles for loss |
| Jowon Briggs | 4 | 3 | 1 tackle for loss |
Easton Mascarenas-Arnold led Cleveland with seven tackles. Donovan McMillon recorded five tackles and defended one pass.
Nathaniel Watson’s three tackles for loss stood out because they represented half of Cleveland’s team total of six. Tackles for loss can interrupt an offense’s planned progression by forcing it into longer-yardage situations.
Jowon Briggs also contributed a tackle for loss, giving Cleveland another defensive player with a recorded play behind the line of scrimmage.
These statistics suggest that Cleveland’s defensive impact was not limited to the interception return touchdown. The unit also generated negative plays and contested passing opportunities.
Philadelphia’s leading tacklers
| Player | Total Tackles | Solo Tackles | Additional Contribution |
| Jeremiah Trotter Jr. | 7 | 3 | Led Philadelphia in total tackles |
| Smael Mondon Jr. | 5 | 5 | 1 tackle for loss |
| Tristin McCollum | 5 | 4 | No additional statistic specified |
| Parry Nickerson | 5 | 3 | 1 tackle for loss, 1 pass defended |
Jeremiah Trotter Jr. led Philadelphia with seven tackles. Smael Mondon Jr. recorded five tackles, all solo, and added a tackle for loss.
Tristin McCollum and Parry Nickerson each recorded five tackles. Nickerson also defended a pass and made a tackle for loss.
Philadelphia’s defensive statistics show that several players were active in tackling and pressure situations. The team recorded three sacks, twice Cleveland’s total. Nevertheless, the defense allowed 132 rushing yards and 199 passing yards.
That contrast is a useful reminder that defensive production is multidimensional. Sacks and tackles can be important individual achievements, but the full evaluation also requires considering how much yardage the defense allows, whether it forces turnovers, and how effectively it limits scoring.
Turnovers and Their Effect on the Final Score
Turnovers were among the most consequential events in the game. Cleveland’s Dillon Gabriel recorded one fumble, which he lost, while Philadelphia’s defensive statistics included a fumble recovery credited to Andrew Mukuba.
Both teams also recorded an interception. Henry returned Cleveland’s interception for a touchdown, and Mukuba returned Philadelphia’s interception for a touchdown.
| Turnover Statistic | Cleveland Browns | Philadelphia Eagles |
| Interceptions thrown | 1 | 1 |
| Interception return touchdowns | 1 | 1 |
| Lost fumbles | 1 | 0 recorded in the supplied data |
| Fumble recoveries | 0 recorded for the team | 1 credited to Andrew Mukuba |
The data supports two important observations.
First, both defenses turned a passing mistake into a touchdown. This made the turnover battle unusual because neither team had a monopoly on defensive scoring.
Second, Cleveland’s offense still recorded a lost fumble. Even though the Browns won, possession security was not perfect.
A turnover can be more damaging than a routine unsuccessful play because it ends the offense’s opportunity to continue the drive and gives possession to the opponent. When a turnover becomes a defensive touchdown, the effect is even larger because the opponent immediately receives points.
However, the final result cannot be attributed to turnovers alone. Cleveland’s rushing advantage, greater passing production, and successful field-goal attempts all contributed to its 22 points and nine-point margin.
Special Teams: Field Goals, Kick Returns, and Punting
Special teams supplied another important difference between the teams. Cleveland made all three field-goal attempts, while Philadelphia did not attempt a field goal.
The Browns’ reliable kicking allowed them to add points when the offense did not score a touchdown. Philadelphia converted its single extra-point attempt, but the supplied statistics list no field-goal attempts.
Kicking statistics
| Kicking Statistic | Cleveland Browns | Philadelphia Eagles |
| Field goals made | 3 | 0 |
| Field goals attempted | 3 | 0 |
| Field-goal percentage | 100% | Not applicable |
| Longest field goal | 49 yards | Not applicable |
| Extra points made | 1 | 1 |
| Total kicking points | 10 | 1 |
Andre Szmyt converted two field goals, including a long of 49 yards, and made one extra point. He scored seven points.
Dustin Hopkins made one field goal from a long of 46 yards, adding three points. Together, the Browns’ kickers contributed 10 points through field goals and an extra point.
Jake Elliott made Philadelphia’s only extra point. Because the Eagles attempted no field goals, a field-goal percentage is not applicable to their performance in this game.
The Browns’ three successful field goals were significant because they provided 10 points without requiring offensive touchdowns. In a contest where Cleveland’s passing game did not produce a touchdown, those points helped turn yardage and field position into a stronger scoreboard result.
Kick-return statistics
| Statistic | Cleveland Browns | Philadelphia Eagles |
| Kick returns | 3 | 4 |
| Return yards | 98 | 94 |
| Average yards per return | 32.7 | 23.5 |
| Longest return | 38 yards | 28 yards |
| Return touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
Cleveland gained 98 yards on three kick returns, averaging 32.7 yards per return. Philadelphia recorded 94 yards on four returns, averaging 23.5 yards.
The Browns’ return average was 9.2 yards higher. Their longest return was also 10 yards longer than Philadelphia’s.
Kaden Davis recorded two returns for 60 yards, with a longest return of 34 yards. Trayveon Williams returned one kickoff for 38 yards.
For Philadelphia, Montrell Johnson Jr. recorded two returns for 47 yards. Keilan Robinson added 24 yards on one return, and Ben VanSumeren contributed 23 yards on one return.
Cleveland’s stronger average return helped its special-teams profile, although neither team scored a kickoff-return touchdown.
Punt-return statistics
Gage Larvadain handled five punt returns for Cleveland, gaining 36 yards at an average of 7.2 yards per return. His longest return was 16 yards.
Philadelphia recorded two punt returns for 21 yards, averaging 10.5 yards. Avery Williams returned one punt for 11 yards, while Ainias Smith gained 10 yards on another.
Philadelphia averaged more yards per punt return, but Cleveland recorded more total return yardage because it had five returns instead of two.
This distinction shows why averages and totals should be considered together. A higher average on a small number of returns does not necessarily mean a team accumulated more return yards overall.
Punting comparison
| Punting Statistic | Cleveland Browns | Philadelphia Eagles |
| Punts | 3 | 7 |
| Total punt yards | 148 | 366 |
| Average punt distance | 49.3 yards | 52.3 yards |
| Longest punt | 59 yards | 67 yards |
| Touchbacks | 0 | 1 |
| Punts inside the 20 | 0 | 3 |
Corey Bojorquez punted three times for Cleveland, averaging 49.3 yards. His longest punt was 59 yards.
Braden Mann punted seven times for Philadelphia, averaging 52.3 yards, with a longest punt of 67 yards. Three of his punts landed inside the 20-yard line, according to the supplied data.
Philadelphia’s punting statistics reflect its greater number of possessions that ended without a scoring opportunity. The Eagles punted four more times than Cleveland.
That difference should not be read as a failure by the punter. Mann’s distance and inside-the-20 figures show that he produced useful individual results. The number of punts primarily highlights the difficulty Philadelphia had sustaining offensive drives.
Key Statistical Takeaways From the Game
The individual numbers become more meaningful when viewed together. Cleveland won 22-13 because it combined stronger offensive yardage with productive rushing, reliable field-goal kicking, and a defensive touchdown.
Philadelphia also produced a defensive touchdown and recorded more sacks, but its offense did not generate enough yardage to match Cleveland’s overall production.
1. Cleveland controlled the ground game
The Browns rushed for 132 yards, compared with 33 for the Eagles. Pierre Strong Jr. led Cleveland with 89 yards, and Ahmani Marshall added a rushing touchdown.
Philadelphia’s longest run was eight yards, and the team averaged just 1.7 yards per carry. The ground-game difference was one of the clearest statistical explanations for Cleveland’s victory.
2. Cleveland generated more passing yardage
The Browns recorded 199 passing yards, compared with 55 for Philadelphia. Dillon Gabriel supplied 143 yards, while Tyler Huntley added 71.
Philadelphia’s Kyle McCord threw a touchdown, but the team’s overall passing output remained limited. The difference of 144 passing yards helped Cleveland maintain a substantial advantage in total offensive production.
3. Both defenses scored touchdowns
KJ Henry returned an interception 45 yards for Cleveland, while Andrew Mukuba returned an interception 75 yards for Philadelphia.
These plays demonstrate how defensive scoring can change a game without requiring a successful offensive drive. They also show why a box score should be examined beyond the conventional passing and rushing categories.
4. Field-goal accuracy helped Cleveland
Cleveland converted all three field-goal attempts. Andre Szmyt made two, and Dustin Hopkins made one.
The Browns’ 10 points from field goals and an extra point supplied a dependable source of scoring. Philadelphia made one extra point and did not attempt a field goal.
5. Philadelphia’s defensive activity did not translate into a win
The Eagles recorded three sacks, compared with Cleveland’s one, and accumulated 72 tackles compared with the Browns’ 50.
Those figures demonstrate individual defensive activity, but they do not tell the complete story. Philadelphia allowed 331 combined passing and rushing yards, while Cleveland allowed 88 in those same categories.
The contrast illustrates the importance of separating individual defensive statistics from overall defensive outcomes.
What These Player Stats Mean for Preseason Evaluation
Preseason games are useful for studying player contributions, but they require a different approach from regular-season analysis. Teams often rotate quarterbacks, test combinations of offensive linemen and receivers, and distribute carries among several running backs.
The Cleveland and Philadelphia statistics illustrate three useful principles.
Evaluate efficiency alongside volume
A player with 80 rushing yards on 12 carries has produced a different statistical profile from a player with 80 yards on 25 carries. Likewise, a receiver with 40 yards on three targets has a different target profile from one with 40 yards on eight targets.
Strong’s 89 yards on 13 carries and Davis’s 44 yards on three targets illustrate why workload and efficiency should be reviewed together. Their figures describe productive performances in this game, but they do not guarantee the same results under different conditions.
Separate scoring from sustained production
A touchdown is important, but it does not explain everything an offense accomplished.
McCord threw a touchdown for Philadelphia, and Smith caught one. Yet the Eagles finished with only 55 passing yards and 33 rushing yards. Their scoring contribution did not translate into sustained offensive production across the entire game.
Cleveland, by contrast, did not record a passing touchdown but produced more than 300 combined passing and rushing yards. Its rushing score, defensive touchdown, and field goals provided different routes to points.
Avoid drawing long-term conclusions from one game
A single preseason box score cannot establish a player’s final depth-chart position, regular-season workload, or future production. Those judgments require additional evidence, including other games, practice reports, roster decisions, and film review.
The most defensible conclusion is narrower: Cleveland’s players produced better combined offensive yardage in this contest, while both teams showed defensive playmaking ability.
For readers who want to verify the numbers, the official ESPN box score for the Browns vs Eagles game provides the relevant game record.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Who won the Cleveland Browns vs Philadelphia Eagles game on August 16, 2025?
The Cleveland Browns defeated the Philadelphia Eagles 22-13 in their NFL preseason game on August 16, 2025. Cleveland improved to 2-0 in the preseason, while Philadelphia fell to 1-1.
2. Who was Cleveland’s leading passer against Philadelphia?
Dillon Gabriel led Cleveland in passing yards with 143, completing 13 of 18 attempts. He threw no passing touchdowns and recorded one interception.
3. Who was the leading rusher in the Browns vs Eagles game?
Pierre Strong Jr. led all listed players in rushing yards with 89 on 13 carries. He averaged 6.8 yards per carry, and his longest run was 54 yards.
4. Which Philadelphia player scored a receiving touchdown?
Ainias Smith caught two passes for 19 yards and recorded Philadelphia’s listed receiving touchdown. Kyle McCord was the Eagles’ leading passer by yardage with 47 yards and one passing touchdown.
5. How many rushing yards did each team record?
Cleveland rushed for 132 yards on 29 attempts, averaging 4.6 yards per carry. Philadelphia recorded 33 rushing yards on 19 attempts, averaging 1.7 yards per carry.
6. Which defensive players returned interceptions for touchdowns?
KJ Henry returned an interception 45 yards for a Cleveland touchdown. Andrew Mukuba returned an interception 75 yards for a Philadelphia touchdown. Each team therefore recorded one interception return touchdown.
Conclusion
The Cleveland Browns vs Philadelphia Eagles match player stats from August 16, 2025, show how Cleveland secured a 22-13 preseason win through a strong running game, greater passing production, and dependable field-goal kicking.
Pierre Strong Jr. led the rushing attack with 89 yards, Dillon Gabriel topped Cleveland’s passing statistics with 143 yards, and Kaden Davis led the Browns’ listed receivers with 44 yards. Ahmani Marshall added a rushing touchdown, while KJ Henry contributed a defensive touchdown on an interception return.
Philadelphia had its own standout moments. Kyle McCord threw a touchdown, Ainias Smith caught a scoring pass, and Andrew Mukuba returned an interception 75 yards for a touchdown. The Eagles also recorded three sacks, demonstrating that their defense produced several notable individual statistics.
The decisive difference was the overall offensive output. Cleveland accumulated 331 combined passing and rushing yards, while Philadelphia recorded 88. The Browns also made all three field-goal attempts, adding points when their offense did not reach the end zone.
Ultimately, the game offers a useful example of how football results emerge from several connected factors. Passing efficiency, rushing production, turnovers, defensive scoring, and special teams all contributed to the final result. Because this was a preseason contest, the figures are best understood as a record of individual and team performances on that particular day, rather than a complete forecast of either team’s regular-season potential.
